Peer Review Process
Nexavium Journal of Cybersecurity and Cyberdefense implements a double-blind peer review process, in which both the authors’ and reviewers’ identities are concealed from each other to ensure fairness, objectivity, and academic integrity.
All submitted manuscripts are first evaluated by the Editors-in-Chief or assigned editors. At this stage, manuscripts may be rejected without external review if they are deemed out of scope, lacking sufficient quality, or not meeting the journal’s standards. This initial screening process enables authors to receive a timely decision.
Manuscripts that pass the initial evaluation are then distributed to a pool of at least 10 potential reviewers selected based on their expertise in the relevant field. From this pool, reviewers who accept the invitation will proceed with the evaluation. The final editorial decision is based on the assessment of at least 3 qualified reviewers who have provided substantive and relevant reviews.
The journal ensures that all reviews are conducted by human experts. Reviews generated solely or primarily through automated tools or artificial intelligence are not accepted as valid peer-review contributions.
Based on the reviewers’ feedback and editorial judgment, manuscripts may be accepted, rejected, or returned to the authors for revision. Authors receiving revision requests are expected to address all comments carefully and resubmit within the specified timeframe.
To maintain confidentiality and the integrity of the review process, Nexavium does not publish or disclose the names of reviewers on its website or in any public documentation.
